Amerika

Posts Tagged ‘christianity’

Why The Churches Failed

Saturday, June 24th, 2017

Christian attendance at churches is dropping, as is the share of Christians in the world religion market. Some industry sources offer insight into the collapse of this once-thriving religion:

I have witnessed both kinds of disaffiliation: ex-mainliners leaving because their churches were so insipid, and ex-evangelicals leaving because they could not reconcile conservative faith with science, critical thinking, or the contemporary world.

…Here is my very tentative proposal for eight other reasons:

–Prosperity and affluence distract people from regular church attendance and reduce a strong sense of need to be in church, gradually eroding not just church attendance but Christian identity.

–The pre-modern claims of traditional Christian faith appear increasingly incredible to postmodern Americans. It has been a very long time since a majority of cultural elites found Christianity’s supernatural claims, for example, to be credible. These elites dominate our culture.

–Hypocrisies and conflicts in church, when they (inevitably) erupt, don’t just drive people to other churches, as in the past, but sometimes take them out of Christianity altogether.

–The fading of cultural Christianity means that fewer and fewer Americans feel any cultural or familial expectation to be in church or practice Christianity. “It was good enough for grandpa” just doesn’t cut it anymore.

–American Christianity is not producing many compelling leaders, and thus the average church (as well as the Church writ large) is not especially inspiring or visionary. Many ministers play it safe in order to keep their jobs, or are simply not that talented.

–The collapse of any protection of Sunday from recreation and work, together with the gig economy, means many people are working or otherwise engaged on Sunday.

–It is harder for parents to pass the faith onto their children in a wired world in which parental influence is in decline.

–Evangelism is dead. No one really knows how to “share the Christian faith” any more in a way that connects with people, and many Christians have stopped trying.

This article seems on-point, but to it we must add another compelling reason: Christianity failed to stop the decline when people depended on it to do so. Instead, it seemed to join the decline as its leaders tried to make it simpler and more accessible to reach more people. Once democratized, it failed because people can get that same experience anywhere else. Church is no longer unique and as a result, has no necessary function in the daily lives of people.

Instead, it too has been ceded to the Left. Once it went down the path of dumbing down, the smart people fled, and idiots were only too happy to surge into the gap and take over, switching the choir to a rock band and the message from self-sacrifice to self-expression. Nothing kills a church like being a place that smart people attend once and then run to the hills.

In my generation, no one goes to church, although we are proportionately more religious in feeling than the previous generation. They go to church because they sense that it is right to do, but we stay at home and try to reach a God who seems to have forsaken this planet, but whom (Whom?) we suspect still loves us and cares about the outcome even down here in this modern wasteland.

If Christianity wants to succeed, it should do what the Orthosphere counsels: stop trying to be like all the other kids. Offer a unique experience that can be found nowhere else. Get out of politics and social commentary. Focus on saving souls and instilling moral awareness, even if the sheep might wake up and realize their civilization is collapsing. Connect people to the divine.

Cucked Southern Baptists Want More Dead Conservatives

Wednesday, June 21st, 2017

The Alt-Right rises. What would Jeebus do? According to the Seduccees, Pharisees and Moneychangers of the Southern Baptist Convention 17, it might not be very nice. They passed a resolution explicitely condeming the Alt-Right. Feel.The.Bern. To see just what happens to sinners in the hands of homosexual church bureaucrats, here you are…

RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention, meeting in Phoenix, Arizona,
June 13–14, 2017, decry every form of racism, including alt-right white supremacy, as antithetical to the
Gospel of Jesus Christ; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we denounce and repudiate white supremacy and every form of racial and ethnic
hatred as of the devil; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we acknowledge that we still must make progress in rooting out any remaining forms
of intentional or unintentional racism in our midst; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we earnestly pray, both for those who advocate racist ideologies and those who are
thereby deceived, that they may see their error through the light of the Gospel, repent of these hatreds,
and come to know the peace and love of Christ through redeemed fellowship in the Kingdom of God,
which is established from every nation, tribe, people, and language.

The ignorance of these cuckservative Never-Trumpers with regards to the Alt-Right is appalling. Here is the poor level of historical understanding that underpinned the resolution aimed at continuing the 2016 GOP Primary half a year after the GOP candidate they didn’t want to see win had been inaugurated as POTUS.

One attendee tweeted the resolution committee did the right thing when they declined to bring the alt-right resolution before the group in the first place: “The res committee and their response is exactly right. It will only be criticized by race baiters and ppl pushing left-wing social issues.” Faithful and vocal Southern Baptist leaders fell on both sides of Trump’s candidacy, with several joining his evangelical advisory board and others speaking out against him. After the election, Moore ended up apologizing to fellow members of his denomination for what some read as insults against all Trump voters, including the majority of white evangelicals who cast ballots for him. “It is, in part, a concern that alt-right will be a label applied to non-racist conservatives who, for example, simply voted for Donald Trump,” said Ed Stetzer, executive director of the Billy Graham Center for Evangelism at Wheaton College, who blogged on the resolution for CT. “However, I think that concern is past its time—the alt-right is the klan without the robes, and Southern Baptists need to speak up on it.”

Crap like this is why any Conservative who thinks the SBC, the moderate GOP blogosphere, or any other vestige of the establishmentarian GOP will keep you off the Proggy train to Triblinka, is barm-smitten and delusional. With friends like these, you need to own more handguns. You see, they just called anyone who claims the label of Alt-Right satanic. They also lumped all Identarians, Ethnic Nationalists, Immigration Restrictionists and pretty much anyone two steps to the Right of Lindsey Graham as bigots.* Labeling is the first step to consigning those people to the Basket of Deplorables. Who needs Hillary and The Resistance when you have these back-knifing SNL Church Ladies?

The Devil, you see, is nowhere near as much of a joke as this year’s SBC makes him out to be. Calling someone satanic is way, way worse than being irate with them for diagreeing with one of your arrogantly dogmatic opinions. When somebody is satanic, they need to be killed. It’s not complicated. It is heresy to let a satanist walk around loose. But then, again, once your church has decided to start a mosque-building program to promote “Religious Liberty” and “Niceness”, it doesn’t take too much longer to get down to issuing a few fatwas.

And satire, aside; they really are building mosques while they simultaneously attempt to ban the Alt-Right.

“It’s good when we can join hands with … folks we are sometimes on the other side of,” said Brent Walker, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. Those folks include the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission and the International Mission Board, both agencies of the Southern Baptist Convention. The National Association of Evangelicals is also supporting the mosque-building case.

They obviously feel this way because Islam is the Religion of Peace and Alt-Righters go around shooting political leaders because of stuff they’ve read on the Internet. Oh wait. That totally isn’t correct. These guys are Cuck-Christians. They think they can play DR3 by showing everyone they can hate the Alt-Right even harder than Bernie Sanders. The Virtue Signal is visible, high above Gotham City. There is a certain passage in The Good Book that the SBC ignores, but that the Alt-Right gets reminded of pretty much every damn day. (Matthew 10: 21-23)

And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Another one the SBC17 may well want bone up on is this one. (Matthew 23:27).

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.

And this is what these people are. Virtue Signalers that flatter the losers and reprobates in order to play to the lowest common denominator of human motivations. They lack the courage to preach the righteous word of The Lord to hungry ears in desperate need of enlightenment. They offer the Cheese-Puff Gospel of What’s Happening Now. If the New York Times tells them the fashionable people want more mosques built, then all good Southern Baptists shall go forth and build mosques to the greater glory of Allah! And if the NYT fears the Alt-Right – get behind me Based Satan!

Cuck hard enough, and you are no longer a decent Christian. Cuck hard enough, and you are not even decent. Cuck hard enough and you will serve only one master. That master craves dead conservatives. Your “Christianity Convention” will produce whatever material that master requires to create more dead Conservatives. The SBC hath yeah verily imbibed of the cuck unto drunken folly. Cucked Southern Baptists now want more dead conservatives. What happened yesterday in Alexandria is exactly what any true believer would seek to do unto Satan.


* — Yep, SBC17 wants to help Lindsey make the bigots shut up. Come let us reason together….

Pagan Christianity

Monday, June 19th, 2017

The Right desperately needs to get right with God.

Perhaps not in the way most would think, this need arises from the confusion about the role of religion in the Right. Some want it to be the basis of the Right and to install a de facto theocracy; others see it as irrelevant; still others argue that conservatism is not based on a single method, as ideology is, and that religion is one part — perhaps not for all people — of a bundle of methods that together make a solution but are not in themselves solutions.

These seem to be prerequisites that can be accidentally made into ideologies. For example, racial and ethnic homogeneity is necessary for a thriving society, but in itself it is not a whole solution, only part of one. Similarly, deposing democracy and equality is a partial solution. Together these and other methods make up a complete society.

For that reason, it makes sense to view religion as not a solution in itself, but also something that at least many of us need. This gets us away from the theocracy that forces us all to become believers, and instead points to rule by culture, which requires strong nationalism to establish.

This takes us in turn to the question, which religion?

Varg Vikernes makes a compelling point for avoiding Christianity. It leads to Leftism, and conspired against our people in the past, not to mention creates the “personal morality” conditions which encourage virtue signaling. In his view, as in Nietzsche’s, it is entirely too pacifistic and fatalistic of a religion.

Onto this we might add one other shining elephant in the room: at least geographically — the Christianity Identity folks have some interesting input here on the origins of Biblical Jews — it is foreign, or simply put not European. The names are not in our languages, nor are the locations, or presumably many of the customs and values.

To this it is important to add that Christianity is also at least from a surface reading, which over time in the hands of large groups is what it will be streamlined to be, it is dualistic, or posits another world where the rules are more real than the rules in this one. In other words, logic is not logic; there is a different logic, more like a human logic, which is actually real.

DARG adds another failing of Christianity, which relates to the personal morality it champions:

The beginning of this is a clarification on the terms sacred and profane. Christianity has made [humans] believe that the sacred is themselves, and equivalent to “tolerance and love” (towards what they define as permissible, of course) and “feeling nice and warm”, and that the profane is everything that opposes that. How convenient. The more historical and philosophical stance, on the other hand, sees in the every-day world, and all that it holds, benign of malignant, as profane; and sees in the world of the exceptional, of man going beyond the merely human, the sacred.

The personal morality of Christianity, and its exoteric nature or tendency to behave like an ideological system more than a deep-learning skill, make it a mixed bag when it comes to religions. It is the great unifier, but that also means it simplifies the message.

Pagan faiths, on the other hand, are monistic — they believe there is no alternate set of rules for the universe, and that all that we need to know can be found in nature, science and logic — and esoteric, or formed of cumulative self-directed learning in which some are naturally gifted to go farther than others. Exotericism is inherently egalitarian; esotericism is innately hierarchical.

In fact, pagan faiths more resemble a philosophy and folkway with metaphysical implications than a religion, or organized spiritual dogma for the sake of shaping mass behavior:

This effort of combining all non-Christian religions under one umbrella was, in fact, a clever strategy by the early Christians to remove the “pagan” faiths altogether. Using the Norse traditions as an example, the Vikings of the early medieval period had no true name for their religious following. In truth, the word religion would have been an unknown, foreign term to them. The Nordic tribes preferred the word “customs” as—like the Greeks and Romans—their rituals, beliefs, and traditions were undefined and fluidly interpreted, orally passed down rather than rigidly studied. There was no all-encompassing word for the belief in the Aesir and Vanir, and the various other beings and deities the ancient Norse worshiped, and there was no written text discussing their practices until the Christian author Snorri Sturluson wrote their mythology down in the 13th century.

Now, the picture gets more complex because Christianity is mostly Pagan. It is clearly a derivative, or rather a compilation and synthesis of the indigenous faiths of lands the Jewish scribes were in contact with, featuring the Greeks whose philosophy they loved above all else. This means that there are Greek, Nordic, Hindu and other faiths retold in the Bible.

There was a reason why formerly “pagan” communities switched to Christianity, namely that it was both mostly familiar and more effective for manipulating herds of people. The exoteric nature of Christianity means that its symbols can be directly adjusted to cause people to behave one way or another. Some of this was positive, namely getting people to leave behind previous antisocial habits.

However, this displacement of the original faiths also led to cultural erasure. When a simpler and more easily understood version of a tradition comes along, especially one that is written, people simply adopt the new and forget the old, which most importantly contains the roadmap to understanding the reasons for the beliefs.

What this means however is that there is a bridge between pagan faiths and Christianity, and that for this reason, we can have faith that is not strictly entrenched in either one, only expressed through it, and that over time, this may change to the simpler and more internal, informal and naturalistic pagan ideation. Consider the Perennial nature of spirituality:

It also makes sense to have some form of metaphysical outlook, perhaps of a Perennialist nature:

At the core of the Perennial Philosophy we find four fundamental doctrines.

  1. The phenomenal world of matter and of individualized consciousness — the world of things and animals and men and even gods — is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be non-existent.
  2. Human beings are capable not merely of knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.
  3. Man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.
  4. Man’s life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to unitive knowledge of the Divine Ground.

If we distill religions to their core and take the intersection, we see a basic starting point that does not necessarily need formalization and, if kept informalized, loses its “human” projection and interpretation, and starts to resemble more the pagan faiths and even older Indo-European religion that our pre-Greek ancestors adopted.

This takes us away from religion as an external constraint that we adopt in order to shape ourselves and become a mass of people acting toward some goal, and reverts it to its original form, which is an observation about the nature of reality that reveals hints of the metaphysical embedded within nature:

As that great non-church and heterodox Christian Rudolf Steiner said: to disbelieve in God is to be, in a real sense, insane; in other words, it is to disbelieve any possibility of coherence, meaning and purpose – which is to regard all of life as a delusion.

…And to deny God within us and the world is to live earthly life in a state of detachment – since we can only observe and never actually participate in reality: we can never know.

In other words, religion is rediscovered by those with clarity of mind who can observe nature; this is the essence of transcendentalism, in which joy arises from understanding the nature of the world and seeing it in logic, therefore wisdom, and therefore beauty and a positive intention toward those of us caught in it, which in turn implies a life-like force to the universe, which per German Idealism — also found in Hinduism — is thought-like, dream-like or composed of thought or information.

In this way, we can see how for the West to rediscover the divine, Christianity must converge on the less formal and more intuitive forms of religious faith, which are the folk customs and existential search of the inner self that produces our classically reflective outlook.

Already we see signs of this. The Orthosphere-style thinkers tend either to embrace Catholicism, or outward-in, religious thinking, or to go the other way and embrace transcendentalism with discipline. This leads to a more naturalistic interpretation of religion that is naturally less obsessed with personality morality and its means-over-ends analysis.

Pagan Christianity, in addition to the Perennial Philosophy traits mentioned above per Aldous Huxley, also has a different map of the cosmos and metaphysical. At its core, this represents a shift from three paths (Father, Son, Holy Ghost) to four:

  1. Information-Space
  2. Godhead
  3. God
  4. Gods

In this mythos, the natural order of a universe comprised of information comes first, and with it the notion that we each have a role to serve determined by our logical placement within this order. Natural law and logic come first, and within them there are other spaces.

Godhead is the animating force of all that we know and the most essential tendencies of the universe. This works within the information-space, shaping us toward the divine and influencing the birth of the gods.

At the top, there is an all-encompassing God which represents holiness itself and less of an active personality than a tendency, like gravity or rain, to order the universe into beauty by balancing darkness and light so that existence itself can prevail. Since the universe is relative, darkness is necessary to emphasize light, much like death gives significance to life.

Below that are the gods, or animistic forces with distinct personalities. These are manifested forces which act according to their own interest, which means that we can respect them without expecting them to judge us or treat us according to some moral standard of our own. They simply do what they do, but they reflect the spirit of godhead, and so are divine while bridging to the profane world of the mundane.

At the bottom are the creatures of Earth and beyond, including humans and plants, who exhibit spirit of their own. These are able to partake in divinity by seeking transcendence and avoiding hubris, but will never fully know what is on the other side because they are limited to a perspective of the physical and individualized.

Perhaps that is enough of a start for now. We have seen how Christianity and Paganism are not that much different, how they share a core, and how we can rediscover that core by starting from reality itself. As with all esoteric things, that represents a doorway opened, and a path upon which each of us will journey a different distance, often down different tributaries.

How Religion May Tear The Right Apart, Again

Thursday, June 15th, 2017

Over at Red Ice, Reinhard Wolff writes a great summary of how operant paradigm shifts produce new ages of history and the challenges to nationalist and traditionalist thinkers from that front:

With that in mind, it’s obvious that we need a new ideology – one that offers room for different religious inclinations.

This new mythos based on the fundamental laws of nature – hierarchy, identity, differentiation, upward evolution and struggle, to name a few. For regardless which stances one takes on metaphysical issues, the laws of nature reign supreme in this world, and civilizations that fall out of the natural order are doomed. This new ideology must support virtue and promotes excellence, strength, beauty, and honor. Most importantly, it must be able to transcend our differences.

Categories can baffle and befuddle us. More important than a particular religion, or even the choice of religion, is our desire to be good. The root of both conservatism and religion is found in a desire to be part of an order larger than the self; this requires enough maturation to stop being fascinated by desires, drama and attention.

That in turn requires a desire to be good, which in turn necessitates realism so that we know what will be good in reality by achieving good results. This forces a split from most religion and politics, which focuses on defining certain methods as good instead of focusing on whether the cumulative results of our actions produce something good and enduring.

In that sense, we do not need an ideology, but a cultural agreement that we wish to be good by doing good, and that religion may have a role in this but only where compatible. Religions will experiencing a type of editing through re-interpretation via this process, and through this, something curious will happen.

While we await the symbolism of a religion of the new age, we do not disagree on content, which is converging more on the pagan than the Christian. The pagan faiths — nature beliefs, not human ones; unwritten, not written; practiced, not theorized — are not the stories of the gods, but a general outlook that includes a belief in a natural hierarchy into which humanity fits and human individuals fit unequally.

If the Alt Right and related movements have a core, it is a rejection of the fundamental idea of The Enlightenment,™ which is that “man is the measure of all things.” Our focus instead is on reality, and how nature plus the divine is the measure of all things, including human survival. That “meta-religion” defines our future more than a specific denomination can.

Bernie Sanders Demonstrates That Leftists Hate Christianity

Thursday, June 8th, 2017

Senator (((Bernie Sanders))) now claims I am un-Amerikan. He thinks I believe some crazy, intolerant stuff. Here’s one example of the crazy.

Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

It’s foundational to being Christian. Unless you got baptized only because you really needed a shower, or were born again because your momma did a pretty sorry job of it the first time. Here’s a pretty fair-minded non-believer’s description of the theology at stake (perhaps waiting to be burned by nut-job SWPLs and SJWs).

Sanders is trying to frame that as bigotry towards religious minorities like Muslims and Jews, but no doubt Russell Vought would say the same of me and the rest of the country’s many, many millions of irreligious people. Embrace Christ or damnation awaits. That’s Christianity 101.

I’ll extend things a little further without loss of generality. Everyone who isn’t saved is damned. To quote the great moral philosopher, Annie Lennox. “I was born an original sinner. I was born in original sin.” If she really didn’t mess with the missionary man, she was liable to feel the burn. Bernie decides to light up Russell Voight, a Trump nominee for a government position, (and make him feel the BERNNN) for his Christian beliefs below.

Sanders (shouting): I understand you are a Christian, but this country are made of people who are not just — I understand that Christianity is the majority religion, but there are other people of different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?

Vought: Thank you for probing on that question. As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs. I believe that as a Christian that’s how I should treat all individuals . . .

Sanders: You think your statement that you put into that publication, they do not know God because they rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned, do you think that’s respectful of other religions?

Vought: Senator, I wrote a post based on being a Christian and attending a Christian school that has a statement of faith that speaks clearly in regard to the centrality of Jesus Christ in salvation.

Sanders: I would simply say, Mr. Chairman, that this nominee is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about.

And then the whole Christianist thing threatens his self-assumed, egocentric monopoly on brotherlove.

“Teacher, what is the most important commandment in the Law?”

Jesus answered: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind. This is the first and most important commandment. The second most important commandment is like this one. And it is, “Love others as much as you love yourself.”

All the Law of Moses and the Books of the Prophets[a] are based on these two commandments.

That gets run run through the logic ringer between the time when Christ talks to Thomas and when Jesus gives up the ghost. If you follow The Lord’s premises you reach an unmistakeable conclusion known as The Great Commission. Here’s how it all works.

  1. You are commanded to love your neighbor.
  2. All people not following Jesus are going to burn in Hell.
  3. .: If you are basically decent at all you “…go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

According Pew Research, 70% of the US Population is at least nominally Christian. This means they at least give lip-service to the concept of original sin and like Nicodemus, need to receive intervention to avoid eternal perdition. So out of a population of 320 million, Senator Sanders has now publically declared approximately 224 Million of them Un-Amerikan.

So WWJD with someone who is this big of a gaping cloaca maxima and who refused to repent? Perhaps The Meat Puppets offer us profound theological insight as to what happens to that sort of a Cis-Gender, White, Heteronormative Bigot in the jolly old dope-ride known as the hereafter.

How Religion Shattered The Leadership Of The West And Let Leftism In

Monday, June 5th, 2017

It does not make sense to blame Christianity for the downfall of the West; the real story is more nuanced.

Christianity was taken up by the rising Left as a means of spreading individualism. Any religion where the choice of the individual to partake is considered a complete introduction to the depth of the faith will naturally become a vehicle for projection, which is why the Catholic church continued the Rabbinical tradition of isolating scholarship to those who had already demonstrated prowess.

This elitist viewpoint is called esotericism, meaning that it is based on mysteries and not memorization. Topics are seen through a qualitative lens that views them as having depth, such that their initial summary in language is a gateway to a series of cause-effect relationships and their implications. The more one learns, the more there is to learn.

Esotericism also relies on logical collisions to determine boundaries, instead of categories. The opposite of esotericism, exotericism, teaches through categories, where a single detail stands for the whole and is presumed to impart that characteristic uniformly to all objects within the category. This provides an easier method of thinking, thus a more popular one.

Logical boundaries on the other hand occur when the thinker looks into the depth of an idea through its extension to a logical extreme and the implications of that, in infinite cycle. This resembles the thinking of a chess player, looking ahead as many moves as possible by accounting for every potential move by the other player. In this view, objects have many details, and it is important to take the interaction of objects with other objects on a case-by-case basis, seeing how the details collide and coincide to determine the nature of those objects. This gives humans less perceived power through an easy method of thinking, but is more accurate.

Christianity suffered weakness because it was based on the Word. The Word first appears in the creation of the world, and then extends as a theme in the Bible through people accepting word tokens as literal truth, without having depth to work through, implying an equality of all people in understanding. This approach lends itself to propaganda.

At first this was an advantage to Christianity. It could induct and unite huge groups of people quickly, which is why the pagan faiths faded away; they simply could not compete. As a theology derived mostly from the Greeks, early Christianity conveyed a strong Indo-European philosophy. But its strengths were also its weaknesses, making it easy to take over from within.

Some claim the rise of Protestantism was part of this process, but it may have been resistance to the effect that having the Bible widely available in lay languages was having within Catholicism.

This upheaval resurrected an old conflict that had lain dormant throughout the middle ages. Before the preceding millennial turn, Throne and Alter had been in conflict as the monarchies of Europe found themselves needing allies during war, and in addition to domestic splintered politics, having to placate special interest groups. The Church too often played as a self-interested party.

With the middle ages, this condition was suspended as some parity was reached and Church and monarchy could work together. However, this was short-lived, as Christianity proliferated into different cults with the rise of mass distribution of the Bible, in part pre-dating the printing press as the supply of hand-copied Bibles accumulated over the years.

At that point, a new internal religious conflict began, one that would eventually give rise to the nascent Leftism of The Enlightenment™ and the Romantic period:

In Cavanaugh’s The Myth of Religious Violence, Cavanaugh presents a thesis which is radically at odds with received wisdom concerning the origin of the secular state. Citing the examples of Baruch Spinoza,Thomas Hobbes and John Locke who presented religious division[ii] as the cause of the conflicts of the period, he notes that this narrative provided:

…the backdrop for much of the Enlightenment’s critique of religion. There developed a grand narrative in Enlightenment historiography — typified by Edward Gibbon and Voltaire — that saw the wars of religion as the last gasp of medieval barbarism and fanaticism before the darkness was dispelled.

More modern liberal thinkers have subsequently traced the birth of liberalism to the so-called religious conflicts of this period, with Cavanaugh citing Quintin Skinner, Jeffrey Stout, Judith Shklar and John Rawls as exemplifying this narrative.

When a conflict of this sort arises, more likely what happens is that one party was neutralized, allowing some event to take place. The “fanaticism” of the medieval era was an attempt to retain balance between different power structures within civilization, because they remembered what happened to Athens, Rome and pre-medieval Europe.

If instead of viewing the religious wars as a conflict between religion and anti-religion, but a struggle for power within civilization, we see that an unnamed third force won: egalitarianism.

As Cavanaugh takes pains to point out, the institutional changes which were supposed to have been ushered in as a result of the religious conflicts actually presaged them. To bolster his argument he provides ample examples of conflict occurring between states with the same denominations, as well as collaboration between differing denominations. The most trenchant observation is provided by the example of Martin Luther:

As Richard Dunn points out, “Charles V’s soldiers sacked Rome, not Wittenberg, in 1527, and when the papacy belatedly sponsored a reform program, both the Habsburgs and the Valois refused to endorse much of it, rejecting especially those Trentine decrees which encroached on their sovereign authority.” The wars of the 1520s were part of the ongoing struggle between the pope and the emperor for control over Italy and over the church in German territories.

In other words, while the Church struggled against the kings, someone else took power. This became The Enlightenment,™ which had fortunate timing in that it caught the early years of the industrial revolution within a century and, because it perfectly justified unlimited growth and tragedy of the commons, replaced religion with the new mythos of the individual.

For this reason, “Christianity caused Leftism” is too simple of an analysis, just like “Christianity is the root of Western Civilization.” The root of Western Civilization is its people, but they depend on quality leadership from the aristocracy in order to be effective. We removed that, and now we are removing our own people so that it can never be reborn.

Idealism And Platonic Forms

Friday, June 2nd, 2017

the patterning of trees, fuck communism

To reconstruct the West, we need a will to be good; this requires some understanding of what good is, and how in a long-term sense it is more beneficial for us to embrace good than the convenient and short-sighted, often referred to as “evil.”

That in turn requires recognizing that what the crowd refers to as “good” is evil and vice-versa, because knowing their own tendency toward evil and venality, they make an ideal of those behaviors in order to avoid criticism for them by those that know better.

This places us in a strange place: we exist in a wasteland where nothing is true and everything is suspect, but are seeking an occult or hidden truth of what is actually real, despite it being right in front of us. We are fighting the mental spam created by the needs and chatter of other human beings.

In addition, we recognize the bias of this time toward the present tense, because it has no future and fears any consequences of its actions. Hence an entire range of thought, from long-term practicality to metaphysics, has been made taboo by the agitation of the herd.

A bias toward the present tense will inevitably favor tangible and material objects over long-term predictions, such as the knowledge of patterns in reality that lead to outcomes far removed from their origins. Present tense recognizes only conditions of objects already existing where their properties determine outcomes, like a match producing fire but not the production of flame itself.

This leads us to questions of cause and effect. What is the cause, the material object or the pattern? Plato says the latter, and he finds support in modern religious thinkers as well:

As Ransom is told in Lewis’s novel, Perelandra, ‘You see only an appearance, small one. You have never seen more than an appearance of anything,’ and he sadly realises, ‘I have lived all my life among shadows and broken images.’

What we think of as tangible and firm objects, being the causes of themselves and having the end goals of themselves, are in fact the least solid part of the process: they are the effect, and the cause is elsewhere, probably in a bigger and more complex formation than that which we think of as physical reality or, at least, immediate physical reality.

Pattern, principle and natural laws — from gravity through human hierarchy — are more solid than the positions we are in now. We are fragile beings, prone to die at any moment or falter as our bodies or souls weaken, but the order of nature prevails over time, more statistically than in the instant. Our tendency is to confuse its momentary abeyance for an exception that proves its invalidity, when inf act the exception proves the rule.

Let us revisit perhaps the most profound thinker the West has produced, Plato, on the nature of reality:

Behold! human beings living in a underground den, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets.

I see.
And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them are talking, others silent.

You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners.
Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?

True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads?

And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would only see the shadows?

Yes, he said.
And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before them?

Very true.
And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing shadow?

No question, he replied.
To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.

Plato describes the inversion effected by reality here: we confuse what we see for the truth of reality, when in fact we are seeing the effect and the cause requires discovery, like solving a mystery, debugging a computer problem, inventing a new algorithm or tracing a fault in a line. Our minds select the weakest link in the chain, the manifestation or instance, and confuse it with the essence or cause.

With this in mind, we can see the wisdom of German Idealism: all in the world is thought or thought-like, because thought operates on the level of patterns and not pure material this-thing-hit-that-thing style thinking. For the golf ball to hit the distant hole, the swing must be of the right pattern, the ball balanced on the tee, the wind at certain levels, and many other factors in balance. It is not as simple as bashing a ball with a club.

Following up the previous part one and part two of this series, this article explores the foundations of European faith.

We know from Perennialism that there is an Ur-faith to all religions which believes that there is a cause beyond the immediate material reality; this takes both an agnostic form, in which patterning over time is more important than reality, and a monistic one, where the metaphysical is seen as a layer or level enclosing our material reality and producing its patterns and results. However, in all of these, the sane believe that this is an order based on nihilistic consistency, or logical actions independent of human desires and perceptions, and therefore is not of the primitive superstitious mysticism that blights third world nations.

A European religion will be like that: unconcerned with individuals, patterned in cycles and forces, and based on the idea that information and order are more important than material substrate. It will thus be Idealistic and Traditionalist, but not in the most common forms of these now, which apply modern superstition — either scientism or fundamentalism — to that which is essentially a logical and logically consistent process independent of our human monkey wishes.

The idea that there is a pattern beyond but manifested in the material might be called animism, or the idea that life has a form as a whole, and that this translates into events rather than those events arising linearly from previous events or material properties. Animism is the idea that life itself is alive and that living things are logical in the way thoughts are logical, meaning that they cast about for possible meanings and then choose the best, rather than being “objective” and “rational” in the way of humans approaching real-time decisions as if they were made in a lab.

Because the natural world is seen as sentient, for an animistic thinker significant events don’t ‘just happen’ – like inert billiard balls bouncing-off one another – instead events occur because some entity wants them to occur. For the animist, every significant event is intentional, every significant event has personal implications.

…The problem is that, for a modern adult, recovery of animistic thinking entails undoing the effects of an exceptionally thorough and prolonged process of socialisation that has buried animism under a vast superstructure of repressions. Modern adults cannot necessarily recover their animistic thoughts at will, even temporarily.

Methods used to help in the recovery of animistic modes of thinking have been known since the Romantic era. They essentially involve detachment from the social systems that tend to maintain objectivity and rationality. For example, solitude (away from people), leisure (away from the economy) and unstructured time (as contrasted with technologically-measured time). Direct contact with nature is another classic strategy. Under such conditions of societal detachment there tends to be a spontaneous resurgence of animistic thinking – and those who can achieve detachment, often strive to do so.

In other words, animism is the original condition of humankind and is obscured by the necessity of maintaining a civilization where most people cannot understand it, therefore need to be manipulated (a form of “control”) via carrot-and-stick style judgments. When we escape the modern world, we are able to see the original truth, and this points us not toward momentary adaptations as economic thinking does, but toward eternal paths toward clarity within ourselves, and through that knowledge of prescriptive use of those material truths so that they can serve cosmic or timeless truths (where “truth” means “a more accurate interpretation of reality relative to other human options”).

The main problem with the Christian interpretation of this is that Christianity is based on the Word, which forms a proxy for reality itself, and as a result it is quickly gamed by Crowdists, who turn it into a dualistic faith or one based on two worlds: (1) the physical world we know, and (2) a spiritual world where things are as they actually are, or are perfected. The problem with this is that it naturally creates a bias against reality because it is perceived as the physical world, and if the other world is perfect, then the physical world is wrong, broken or otherwise unimportant. Second, it encourages people to project their desires into this spiritual world because there is no data for how it actually works, so it becomes a manifestation of human intent rather than a reflection of the type of dry logical consistency we see in nature. Christianity takes on a “New Age” interpretation because people see in this “pure” world the idea of ideology, which is that in that world, things operate as they “should” according to human lowest common denominator desires, which reflect weakness more than reason and sensibility.

Animism relies heavily on the same mechanism as Idealism, which is a union between mental state and world, taking the ancient concept of intentionality to a level of ontology, or means of understanding the world:

In medieval logic and philosophy, the Latin word intentio was used for what contemporary philosophers and logicians nowadays call a ‘concept’ or an ‘intension’: something that can be both true of non-mental things and properties—things and properties lying outside the mind—and present to the mind.

Intentionality defines our relationship with reality and provides for us the basis of understanding Idealism. This definition is a complex way of saying that our mental concepts do not necessarily align with what is in the world, and that thoughts can be logically true without being true-in-fact, and that for that reason, our primary quest in philosophy is to figure out which concepts are accurate, which becomes difficult when there is not an external object to which they can relate. In animism, the world operates according to conceptual principles, which means that the mind can discipline itself to find the inner properties of external objects and from that, discover their actual nature as opposed to their merely-intentional or purely conceptual nature.

As a result, the ancient faiths were forms of monism or a belief that no matter what metaphysical layers exist on top of this world, the logical rules derived from this world also applied to those “worlds”:

Vedānta is nominally a school of Indian philosophy, although in reality it is a label for any hermeneutics that attempts to provide a consistent interpretation of the philosophy of the Upaniṣads or, more formally, the canonical summary of the Upaniṣads, Bādarāyaņa’s Brahma Sūtra. Advaita is often translated as “non-dualism” though it literally means “non-secondness.”

…According to Advaita metaphysics, Brahman—the ultimate, transcendent and immanent God of the latter Vedas—appears as the world because of its creative energy (māyā). The world has no separate existence apart from Brahman. The experiencing self (jīva) and the transcendental self of the Universe (ātman) are in reality identical (both are Brahman), though the individual self seems different as space within a container seems different from space as such. These cardinal doctrines are represented in the anonymous verse “brahma satyam jagan mithya; jīvo brahmaiva na aparah” (Brahman is alone True, and this world of plurality is an error; the individual self is not different from Brahman). Plurality is experienced because of error in judgments (mithya) and ignorance (avidya).

Humans break down any faith according to what is convenient for the human mental state, which generally involves that which requires the least discipline of the inner impulses and external behaviors of the self for intangible reasons. People will change in order to make money, make friends or gain social status, but when told they must change in order to be aligned with the order of nature that offers them no tangible reward, they tend to resist this and instead retreat into the world of their own thoughts, thoughts shared with others through language, and physical objects including the management thereof such as economics. This is the human world; it is easy to rely on, and it requires nothing of the individual but participation in nominal events such as jobs, social interaction and shopping.

For these reasons, much as we escape modern institutions because they are tainted with human illusions, the same must be applied to religion. Our goal is to discover the Idealism within Animism and through that, to understand the purpose of religion outside of its external trappings — work hard, be nice to other people, say the magic words — and through that, to rediscover how our inner goodness can find an outlet in religion for understanding the task of life.

In this light, the question is not so much Christianity or Paganism, but how to find in each the parts that fit with our task of spiritual revival in the West. Whichever one we use will eventually return to this original religion because people now have a memory of distrust for organized, formal and written religion. The result of this uncertainty will be a return to the pagan outlook, no matter what religion was chosen, of encoding belief in ritual and custom, not word and law.

Western Civilization Faces A Spiritual Struggle

Wednesday, May 31st, 2017

I think now, looking back, we did not fight the enemy, we fought ourselves, and the enemy was in us. – Chris Taylor, Platoon

In the previous post in this series, we established that Christianity alone cannot save Europe. It needs a cultural revival, which in turn needs aristocracy, leading to a sensible plan.

However, it is worth remembering that Western Civilization will not restore itself until it resurrects its spirit which desires to be more than materialistic. There is a step there which is required before we can get to religion, and religion cannot stand alone, but our spiritual struggle in the West begins with the desire to be good not in a personal context, but in the context of natural order. Our goal is to exhibit the inverse of hubris. In that mode, we seek to find our place within an unequal natural hierarchy, and do what is fit to the body in which we have been incarnated.

This need clashes with a basic human tendency to assert ourselves first, or “individualism,” which is a temptation whenever the human is not immediately threatened by want of food, shelter, safety or mates. The simplest form of human existence consists of caring about oneself only, and forgetting the consequences of actions beyond that.

However, civilization arose when people beat this impulse and started caring about what they created outside of themselves. In this viewpoint, the importance of actions lay in their effects on a long timescale, such that an individual would consider what would happen for the next ten thousand years or longer when contemplating what action to take.

That was the birth of the transcendentals. Transcendentals are immutable, yet relative, measurements, much like the thought process of an athlete who wants to do better than his previous record, no matter what that was. There is infinite improvement in life, but it occurs on a qualitative level, meaning proficiency and elegance more than raw factors like time taken or weight moved. A dancer can execute the same maneuver in the same amount of time, but add artistry, efficiency, acumen and aesthetic improvement on a scale reaching toward infinity.

And thus, we reach a sense of what it is we must reach for: the “good,” for example, but on the epic mythic-historical scale of existence beyond ourselves, and on a spectrum of measurement that includes millennia and beyond. What is good for today and what is good for all time are often markedly different things.

Remember Plato’s warning which identifies the root of civilization decay:

When discord arose, then the two races were drawn different ways: the iron and brass fell to acquiring money and land and houses and gold and silver; but the gold and silver races, not wanting money but having the true riches in their own nature, inclined towards virtue and the ancient order of things. There was a battle between them, and at last they agreed to distribute their land and houses among individual owners; and they enslaved their friends and maintainers, whom they had formerly protected in the condition of freemen, and made of them subjects and servants; and they themselves were engaged in war and in keeping a watch against them.

In other words, the good is that which acts toward “virtue and the ancient order of things,” namely the one stable form of civilization from which other parts of the historical cycle are deviations. Virtue means doing the right thing according to a hierarchy of nature, instead of acting through the deferential morality of the herd, which along with apathy forms the two major deviations from rightness.

Once we understand this definition of good, we realize how difficult the Occident is versus the Orient and Africa: while they have nature-religions in Africa, and either timeless Confucianism or momentary Shintoism in Asia, the Western Way is to live for a principle of eternity. We are the reflective people who seek to build in our souls a mirror of external reality, and then to bring it to a point of divinity.

If we are to resurrect this spirit, it will occur before we choose a religion or a philosophy. It is a gut-level, intuitive and soul-rending decision. It is the reformation of the being to be more than our glorious Simian heritage. We must want to rise to a level of excellence where we reach past evil, stupidity and the mundane toward the exceptional, glorious, good, beautiful, honest and real.

This spirit is more important than the form that religion takes. As Aldous Huxley points out, most religions have the same basic philosophy when we look for intersections and not aspects of them that are specific to their host cultures:

At the core of the Perennial Philosophy we find four fundamental doctrines.

  1. The phenomenal world of matter and of individualized consciousness — the world of things and animals and men and even gods — is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be non-existent.
  2. Human beings are capable not merely of knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.
  3. Man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.
  4. Man’s life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to unitive knowledge of the Divine Ground.

Once we recognize the above as the archetype of religion, it becomes clear that we must focus on the good to reach the above, and then need to choose a religion that fits our culture. If Christianity has a fatal flaw, it is that it is foreign, in a foreign language, from a land which is not European and a people who at least now are no longer European.

Christianity won out over Paganism because Christianity unites groups, but by doing so in lieu of aristocracy and culture, it creates weak bonds that shatter and leave a lowest common denominator behavior in their wake. This is why the West is slowly abandoning Christianity: it thwarted our kings and then devolved to its core, which is individualism.

As a result, it will not be surprising if in another hundred years religion will be entirely different. We will use the same churches, many of the same rituals and songs, and even the same holidays. But the understanding will have changed: religion is not something you get from a book, but by going into a forest and searching your intuition for what is compatible with nature as you observe it.

In addition, despite the hopes of the religious conservatives out there, we cannot resurrect our civilization through religion. We can resurrect our civilization so that religion among other things will survive, but religion alone cannot save us; we need to want goodness first, and to change power structures to aristocracy so that we can rule by it. Only then can religion live.

This does not change the fact that we take a “religious” view of our survival: we are at war against evil, which sometimes wins with no rhyme or reason, but is always with us and so we must always be at war against it. We cannot use external forces to shape ourselves internally — such an approach is properly known as “materialism” — but must reverse our egos, which insist that we control our worlds, and instead nurture inner forces to manifest as external order in balance with both intuition and the natural world around us.

Julius Evola described this pagan world of tradition:

What most distinguished the pre-Christian world, in all its normal forms, was not the superstitious divinization of nature, but a symbolic understanding of it, by virtue of which (as I have often emphasized) every phenomenon and every event appeared as the sensible revelation of a supra-sensible world. The pagan understanding of the world and of man was essentially marked by sacred symbolism.

…On this basis, all the great pre-Christian cultures shared the striving for a supra-natural freedom, i.e., for the metaphysical perfection of the personality, and they all acknowledged Mysteries and initiations. I have already pointed out that the Mysteries often signified the reconquest of the primordial state, the spirituality of the solar, Hyperborean races, on the foundation of a tradition and a knowledge that were concealed through secrecy and exclusivity from the pollutions of an environment already in decay.

If there is a core to paganism and traditionalism, both of which overlap with a strong sense of “place” including nationalism, this is it: a Platonic understanding of form and pattern, in which all events and objects are manifestations of an underlying order in which all things have unequal places.

Since this pagan core forms the basis of the Perennial Philosophy which is also found in Christianity, it is sensible to say that Christianity is pagan, with additional ideas grafted on, but put into an unfortunate form. In this way, it is clear that the West will be neither non-Christian nor non-Pagan, but probably a bit of both for some time as the original faith is resurrected in its esoteric — cumulative and unequal — form.

There is more to say on this, but it should probably occur in a subsequent post.

Paganism Cannot Unite Europe; Christianity Can, But That Will Be Our Doom For Reasons Unrelated To Christianity

Tuesday, May 30th, 2017

Über-Right-wing mastermind Varg Vikernes has been engaged in a video dialogue with Swedish trad-Right guru Marcus Follin, a.k.a. “The Golden One.” The topic of their discord appears to be Christianity, with Follin arguing that it can unite Europe and Vikernes arguing that it cannot.

In his recent interview with Amerika, Ramzpaul argues that “Paganism did not bind all of Europe, Christianity did.”

Who is correct?

Some analysis oriented toward logical fact will show us that they are all right, to varying degrees, but that the question may have become mangled by our modern orientation in thinking. To see this, we have to look at the nature of what it means to unite a nation or a continent.

There are many ways of uniting a nation and we might rank them from “strong” to “weak.” The weakest are things like ideology, economics and politics. These are unions of convenience and reflect no inner impulse by people to work together toward a certain ideal. Others are intermediate, like religion, which is still external, where the strongest are internal, like race and tribe.

We should also consider the degree of unity. It is not hard to get people to act together in self-interest, but this produces the side effect of people acting against unity because self-interest is stronger than what binds them together. If the unity of a group is based on a weak force, it will rapidly disintegrate and the group will devolve to the lowest common denominator.

So our question is not a binary — unites/does-not-unite — but a question of degree and specific topic areas, namely what is united and how long-lasting those bonds will be.

One cannot unite a nation or a continent by religion. Religion straddles the line between internal and external. It is internal because religion is understood through the intuition, but that applies to general religious feeling, and not a specific religion. As a result, we are left with only the external, which is what might be called a religious dogma, for lack of a better term.

Modernity specializes in using the external to control the internal. You see a symbol, decide to obey it, and that influences how you think about the world. You are controlled and shaped as part of a mass of people because everyone is equal, so numbers matter more than quality of person or the unique insights of that person.

Internal motivation however requires understanding and cannot be communicated through symbols. It can be sketched, outlined, silhouetted, hinted at and described, but the actual thing cannot be conveyed between one mind and another. The person must be able and ready to reach that stage on their own, no matter how much hinting and nudging goes on.

This means that by trying to force people to unite on religion, we are being very modern and forcing the use of external traits to shape internal ones. In this capacity, religion behaves like an ideology — comparable to Communism or egalitarianism — in which the mass shows obedience to the ideology, and for doing so, is accepted in the group.

At its core, this method fails because the idea of ideology is external manipulation, which means that the individual is acting for reward and to avoid threats. This means that they do not actually internalize the ideology, but obey it like a traffic cop, tax auditor, or meter enforcement. They obey because it is convenient, but the real principle taught is self-interest.

Paganism recognized that only culture can bind us. Culture is both external and internal, in that anyone from a specific area has at least a genetic affinity toward the values of that culture. Through culture, an interpretation of religion arises that fits the specific group and enables them to be effective in using it.

Culture however cannot stand alone. People do not spontaneously unite around culture because it is intangible. It consists of sentiments, aesthetics, “gut feelings,” intuition and other completely organic and non-symbolic components. Culture requires strong leadership formed by an aristocracy instead of the weak leadership — bound with weak forces — of authoritarian states.

Aristocracy is strong power because it has the right to be arbitrary. A king does not have to prove that there should not be a block of ugly apartments next to a cozy neighborhood; he just orders it, on the basis of his judgment and aesthetics being superior in terms of understanding natural order (i.e. more “divine”) than those of others. Usually the king is right; the herd is always wrong.

Now this causes us a problem, because we have one strong way of uniting a nation or continent (aristocracy/culture) and many weak ways. The problem with the weak ways is that they will work at first, and then fail catastrophically.

Consider the history of Christianity. It was adopted for practical reasons because unlike Paganism it was written down and could be understood by the average person. It united the continent. But then, clashes between kings and churches arose because they were competing for power. The singular power of the kings had been broken by a weak force.

Within a few hundred years, Christianity then began its death cycle, and today the only people found at churches are the old and sick. Was this a problem with Christianity?

As it turns out, no: it was a consequence of using a weak force where we need a strong force. Christianity can only thrive under aristocrats because they return it to its proper role, which is spiritual guidance, and it must like a wife defer to the husband for questions of leadership, safety, long-term planning and war.

If we unite under Christianity, it will become an ideology, and we will then have a false unity and a controlling force followed by its collapse and our reversion to the lowest principles of self-interest. Since a particular religion like Christianity is external, it controls by self-interest, and when it fades, only that principle remains, but all restraints on it are gone.

Ancient societies operated not through a single method, like ideology, but through many heterogeneous methods in service to a few strong principles. Aristocrats were those who got to the bottom of any question, and with this knowledge, then asked themselves what they could do to make the situation turn out for the best. Wisdom and nobility together were the requisite abilities.

Weak forces fail for the same reasons all human groups do. They become proxies for reality, and then people learn how to game the system by working the proxy, and forget how to achieve the results they want in reality. The letter of the law becomes more important than the spirit of the law or its goals, and the group collapses.

In other words, Follin and Ramzpaul are right: Christianity can unite Europe. But then, Varg is also correct: that weak unity will then destroy Europe, much as it proved problematic in the past.

This does not mean that Christianity is a bad thing per se, only that it is the wrong thing to use to unify Europe. Until we remove democracy and restore aristocracy, Europe will not unite except on weak forces, which will collapse into quasi-anarchy like ideology, economic systems as motivation, and politics have.

At the same time, we must consider what Europe should look toward in terms of religion. But that is a question for another post, perhaps tomorrow.

Why Christianity Is Dying

Saturday, May 27th, 2017

When Christians wonder why the pews are less full, the answer is simple: Christianity has, like Leftism, followed an individualistic path that glories the self and denies reality, including its metaphysical aspects.

For the most recent guffaw on this topic, witness the suicidal Christian desire to use invaders as pew-fillers:

Some say it is an act of demographic conquest. Others argue it is a product of a failed American foreign policy. But one of America’s best known apologists says the crisis for the Christian West could be a new opportunity to win converts to the faith.

Joel Richardson, New York Times bestselling author of “The Islamic Antichrist” and the new book “Mystery Babylon,” says missionaries should not overlook the unique opportunity they’ve been given with the current wave of Muslim immigrants.

“Throughout history, the Lord has always used catastrophes for His own redemptive purposes,” he told WND. “This is exactly what He is doing now with the current Syrian war and the global Muslim refugee crisis. Obviously mass Muslim immigration to the West has innumerable long-term problems. Any casual glimpse at Western Europe reveals this. European secularism, socialism and multiculturalism have failed to incorporate the Muslim immigrants.”

The above treats Christianity as an ideology, which is what all individualists tend to do. Their beliefs are designed for their protection as individuals, and they need a herd to enforce those beliefs, so they create a network of rules designed to force others to not do anything that interferes with the ability of the individual to be individualistic, a condition in which they externalize the cost of their own behavior to society at large and profit from the exchange.

Christians of this nature want to build an army of true believers and they do not particularly care who those people are so long as there are many of them. Quantity, not quality, as usual. The downside of this is that the newcomers always adapt Christianity to their own needs, as any culture does, and soon we are back at square one.

But in the meantime, this author will get his headlines. His books will sell because his congregation is desperate for anything which makes a threat seem like a non-threat, and therefore, justifies the standard conservative behavior of doing nothing and paying taxes to fund the large government they hate.

And through his success, that of Christianity and society at large will be diminished.

Recommended Reading